Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1959 Page 1 of about 13 results (0.103 seconds)

Feb 04 1959 (HC)

Grand Hotel, Abid Road, Hyderabad Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyde ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-04-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP67; [1959]36ITR453(AP)

..... indian income-tax act bearing on this application are in consonance with the statutory requirement of the indian partnership act as also of the indian income-tax act.5. it is enough in this case to extract rules 2 and 3, omitting ..... the unnecessary portions.rule 2: any firm constituted under an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners may, under the provisions of section 26-a of ..... registration of a firm is the existence of a genuine partnership. if the income-tax officer is not satisfied that there is really a partnership, he can deny the benefits of registration to the assessee. a partnership involves the concept of sharing the profits. section 4 of the indian partnership act (ix of 1933) declares a partnership to be 'the relation between persons who have agreed to ..... share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all'. the rules framed under section 59 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1959 (HC)

Chandaji Sukhraj and Company Vs. Lal and Co. (Tobacco Trading Company) ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-20-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP444

..... are unenforceable in a court of law. 5. the argument for the defendants is that the object of the agreement, of partnership is illegal under section 23 of the indian contract act inasmuch as it is 'forbidden by law'. a prohibition may be express or may be inferred from the penalties. in regard to the wholesale purchase or sale of tobacco as ..... memorandum of cross objections), my learned brother had to consider these two sub-rules and expressed : 'the rule docs not prohibit the licensee from entering into a partnership as under the provisions of the abkari act. sri konda kotayya, the learned advocate for the appellant, laid great stress on the full bench decision of the madras high court in : air1950mad444 . the full ..... nothing but a fiscal one intended for collecting taxes and that no question of public policy or illegality arises so as to attract the provisions of section 29 of the indian contract act. for the reasons aforesaid, i am unable to follow with great respect the view taken by rajagopala iyengar j. in : air1957mad186 as regards the scope and effect of rule ..... a decision on this ground. i am definitely of the view that there is no prohibition against the formation of a partnership in regard to the business conducted under a licence granted under the act. there is no illegality vitiating the partnership and the suit is perfectly maintainable. the decision of the lower court is set aside and the suit remanded to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1959 (HC)

Pamulapati Bhushayya Vs. Kommareddy Chinnapareddi and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-13-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP39

..... as other than innocent merely because it discouraged competition amongst the partners themselves. in these circumstances we have no hesitation in holding that section 23 of the contract act does not hit the partnership and consequently the settlement of account and the promissory note executed for the payment of the amount is not void.6. in this view of the matter, ..... the appellant does not challenge the finding of the trial court. the only question is whether the partnership is illegal and unlawful and consequently the promissory note executed in settlement of account of an illegal partnership void and unenforceable under section 23 of the indian contract act. it may be stated that the first respondent had a licence to carry on tobacco trade for ..... apart from the fact that under the rule there is a clear distinction, cases under the abkari, opium or forest acts have no application in determining, the validity of partnerships made in contravention of the provisions of the central excises and salt act, as the prohibition is for protection or convenient collection of revenue. where, therefore, a statute merely imposes a penalty ..... said persons had a licence to operate individually in a specified area. the question, therefore, is whether such a partnership is illegal. in our view, this would depend upon the question whether the prohibitions contained in the central excise act and the rules made thereunder are for the protection of revenue or are designed to achieve the object of a public .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1959 (HC)

Govula Ramakistiah Vs. Yerram Yellappa

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-09-1959

Reported in : AIR1959AP653

..... of equity.' thus, it would follow that in cases involving special circumstances one partner can sue another during the subsistence of the partnership without asking for its accounts or dissolution we may ad this stage refer to the following authorities: hari shankar misra v. firm bansilal abirchand, air 1946 nag 266. this ..... examination of the cases mentioned below will show that the old rule of english law that the court will not interfere between partners except for the purpose of dissolving the partnership, or if it was dissolved already for finally winding up its affairs, has been relaxed in modern times in recognition of the necessities of commercial communities and the dictates ..... , do not involve the taking of general accounts, the court can give the relief applied for. thus one partner may sue another for accounts during the subsistence of the partnership without asking for its dissolution, if there exist circumstances which can excuse a departure from the general rule under which accounts and dissolution should be asked together. what those circumstances ..... a certain person, or to the bearer of the instrument.' the learned counsel for the appellant relying on this definition of a promissory note in section 4 of the indian negotiable instruments act contends that the suit sircath falls within this definition. we are not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. the suit sircath is not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1959 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Vs. Rayalaseema Oil Mills, T ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-09-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP23

..... side. the point presented by the counsel for the assessee is that section 44 contemplates only discontinuance of the business and not dissolution of the partnership. since the legislature was aware of this difference, st has employed different expressions with reference to a firm and an association of persons.in ..... individual partners' will be different from the one that is said to have suppressed the income i.e., the partnership. one of the reasons, that weighed with the bench that decided : [1956]29itr241(mad) in coming to the conclusion that 'penalty' could not ..... of the person, who concealed the particulars of the income with the person who is sought to be penalised. that identity cannot exist when the partnership that is said to be guilty of concealment, had ceased to exist. if the provisions of section 28 are incorporated into section 44, the ' ..... incurs the penal consequences contemplated by that section. the pertinent point for consideration is whether this section can be invoked in a case of dissolved partnership as in the instant case. that, in its turn, depends upon section 44, which is in these words;'where any business, profession or ..... court that 'assessment' would not include 'penalty'. it is true that they were dealing with the applicability of section 13(1) of the indian finance act but the principle is the same and that would govern equally the situation arising under section 44. therefore, the judgment of the privy council cited .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1959 (HC)

A. Venku Dikshitulu Vs. Gundu Subbayya Setti and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-11-1959

Reported in : AIR1959AP518

..... j., raises the question as to the power of an official receiver to keep a debt alive by making a payment under section 20 of the indian limitation act.2. the material facts may be stated in a few words. the defendant in o. s. no. 9 of 1950 on the file of ..... bom 91), we are unable to concur in their opinion. this decision does not discuss the import and implications of section 28 of the provincial insolvency act. the judicial opinion is preponderently against the theory adumbrated there.12. apart from the catena of the decisions of the madras high court, there is ..... mad 1122, which is based on the provisions of section 354, civil procedure code (14 of 1882) which is analogous to section 28 of the present provincial insolvency act, it was laid down that the official receiver, in whom the estate of the insolvent vests, could give on 'acknowledgment', being the party against whom such ..... on the mortgage.secondly, it was maintained that this payment by the official receiver did not operate to save limitation under section 20 of the limitation act, since the official receiver was not 'a person liable to pay' the mortgage debt and consequently ha could not be regarded as a duly ..... right' is claimed within the meaning of section 19 of the limitation act.in krishnayya v. sitaramayya, air 1937 madras 764, venkataramana rao t. held that a receiver appointed in a suit for dissolution of partnership, for collecting the assets of the partnership and payment of the debts due to the creditors of the firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 1959 (HC)

Venigalla Ramakrishnaiah Vs. Pillutla Sitaramasastry.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-30-1959

Reported in : [1960]40ITR708(AP)

..... is entitled to be reimbursed from the defendant the amount of income-tax that he paid under the provisions of section 69 of the indian contract act. section 69 of the indian contract act reads as follows :'a person who is interested in the payment of money which another is bound by law to pay, and who ..... in such payment which the respondents were bound by law to pay.the learned counsel for the respondent argued that the case was not one of a partnership but of a limited company and in this case the shareholders had nothing to do with the payment of the income-tax. it was submitted that ..... that the existence of the proprietary interest in the person making the payment is not a sine qua non for the application of section 69 of the indian contract act. the words 'interested in the payment of money' which another is 'bound by law to pay' has been held to include a person who pays ..... pay the amount of income-tax paid by the plaintiff and decreed the suit. it also applied the provisions of sections 69 and 70 of the indian contract act. on appeal the lower appellate court differed from the trial court and held that under the law the plaintiff could not recover the amount from the ..... of india for the proposition that bound by law covers obligations of contract or tort. accepting this interpretation, as their lordship do, they hold that the act of payment by the appellant company gave to it a right of action against the maharajah to obtain reimbursement of the sum so paid'. in this connection, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1959 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. Rayalaseema Oil Mills.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-09-1959

Reported in : [1959]37ITR208(AP)

..... side. the point presented by the counsel for the assessee is that section 44 contemplates only discontinuance of the business and not dissolution of the partnership. since the legislature was aware of this difference, it has employed different expressions with reference to a firm and an association of persons. in ..... of the person, who concealed that particulars of the income with the person who is sought to be penalised. that identity cannot exist when the partnership that is said to be guilty of concealment had ceased to exist. if the provisions of section 28(1)(c) are incorporated into section 44, ..... . the expression 'and for the amount of tax' throws a flood of light on the interpretation of that section. the partners of the quondam partnership are liable to pay only the tax as determined by the assessment. indisputably, tax does not include penalty. this is made clear by section 29 ..... incurs the penal consequences contemplated by that section. the pertinent point for consideration is whether this section can be invoked in a case of a dissolved partnership as in the instant case. that, in its turn, depends upon section 44, which is in these words :'where any business, profession or ..... court that 'assessment' would not include 'penalty'. it is true that they were dealing with the applicability of section 13(1) of the indian finance act but the principle is the samer and that would govern equally the situation arising under section 44. therefore, the judgment of the privy council cited .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1959 (HC)

V.G. Sarma and Co. Firm and ors. Vs. Friends and Co. and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-30-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP13

..... trial and disposal on merits.2. the relief sought in the plaint was for rendition of accounts. it was stated therein that defendants 2 to 4 constituted themselves into a partnership and iraded under the name and style of v. g. sarma and co., the 1st defendant. on 27-11-1948, the 1st defendant and the plaintiff entered into an agreement ..... in effect suing for an indemnity against his principal and that it was not a suit for account within the meaning of article 31 of the provincial small cause courts act and consequently not excluded from its jurisdiction. a casual observation was however made at the fag-end of the judgment that an agent cannot call upon his employer for an ..... ex parte. it was contended before me on behalf of the appellant that inasmuch as the liability to render account lies with the agent under section 213 of the contract act and no such corresponding liability is cast upon the principal, the agent is bound to sue for a specific amount within the meaning of the first paragraph of order 7 ..... of the plaint, the plaintiff valued the suit at rs. 100/- and paid a court-fee of rs. 11-3-0 under section 7(iv)(f) of the court fees act inasmuch as according to him the suit was one for an account of the dealings between the plaintiff and the defendants.3a. the court-fee examiner objected that as the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1959 (HC)

Employers of the Osmania University, Hyderabad Vs. Industrial Tribunal ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-16-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP388; (1960)ILLJ593AP

..... ,.....' the tribunal has in deciding the dispute to be industrial been very much influenced by the following passage of halder in his book 'evolution of labour management relations and the indian law of industrial disputes'', part ii, page 19, para 3 :'hence, a charitable institution like this hospital, the university, a free school or college, a public body like a municipal ..... , also held that a firm of solicitors is not an industry within the meaning of the act. at page 469 this learned judge observes as follows :'industry is a partnership between labour and capital and the industrial product is the result of that co-operation and partnership. they each have a share in building the product of industry. both capital and labour are ..... suspension. the municipal workers' union of which the aforesaid employees were member questioned the propriety of the dismissal and the matter was referred to the tribunal under the industrial disputes act, which found the case to be of victimisation and directed their re-instatement. the application under article 226 was dismissed by calcutta high court, and the order was affirmed by ..... or unskilled manual, supervisory, technical or clerical work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied, and for the purposes of any proceeding under this act in relation to an industrial dispute, includes any such person who has been dismissed, discharged, or retrenched in connection with, or as a consequence of, that dispute, or whose .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //